Religion, what's the point?

Stick said:
but I wouldn't call their beliefs nonsense just because I think it's unlikely that a god exists just because that is my belief.
Click to expand...
So don't.

People on our side of the argument have burned on stakes for their beliefs. Heaven forbid we should have the audacity to commit the atrocious crime of calling their faith nonsense. It's really unfair isn't it. Poor believers, how will they feel?
 
Stick said:
They believe they do though. They believe god was the catalyst. In the same way you believe he wasn't and yet we can't show he wasn't the catalyst yet.
Click to expand...

We can't prove that Stoke won't win the Premier League next season, but we can sure as hell laugh at anyone who believes it.
 
ciderman9000000 said:
Not a good example because I already know who won the 1992 Euros.

You're avoiding the point.
Click to expand...

What is your point? My point is you can't ridicule people for a belief in god because you can't disprove it yet.
 
Moonwalker said:
So don't.

People on our side of the argument have burned on stakes for their beliefs. Heaven forbid we should have the audacity to commit the atrocious crime of calling their faith nonsense. It's really unfair isn't it. Poor believers, how will they feel?
Click to expand...

Our side? I don't believe in god but I wouldn't insult someone for believing in a god. Past persecutions don't come into it for me. Different times.
 
Stick said:
What is your point? My point is you can't ridicule people for a belief in god because you can't disprove it yet.
Click to expand...

We can't prove that a spaceship won't come along and take the Scientologists to the promised land. We can't prove that Stoke won't win the Premier next season. We can't prove that unicorns don't exist.

We can ridicule those who believe it though.
 
ciderman9000000 said:
We can't prove that Stoke won't win the Premier League next season, but we can sure as hell laugh at anyone who believes it.
Click to expand...

OK that's pretty much my stance but if there was a Stoke supporter at dinner with me and I started pointing and laughing at him for supporting a club he has grown up supporting purely because he believes they will win the premiership next year am I an asshole?
 
ciderman9000000 said:
We can't prove that a spaceship won't come along and take the Scientologists to the promised land. We can't prove that Stoke won't win the Premier next season. We can't prove that unicorns don't exist.

We can ridicule those who believe it though.
Click to expand...

May all my words be sweet for tomorrow I may have to eat them.
 
Stick said:
What is your point? My point is you can't ridicule people for a belief in god because you can't disprove it yet.
Click to expand...

Personally, I'd commit to not ridiculing religious beliefs if they'd commit to not teaching children religion when they're defenseless. Ridicule is the main weapon we have to act as a weapon against this brainwashing so it's very difficult to give it up unilaterally.
 
Stick said:
OK that's pretty much my stance but if there was a Stoke supporter at dinner with me and I started pointing and laughing at him for supporting a club he has grown up supporting purely because he believes they will win the premiership next year am I an asshole?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't laugh at him for supporting Stoke just as I wouldn't laugh at somebody for wishing that God existed. I'd laugh at him if he believed Stoke were going to win the league though just as I'd laugh at somebody for believing in God.

Truth be told, I feel sorry for people who believe in God; I think ridiculing faith is the best way for the world to escape the poison of religion.

I was religious once, as a child. Ironically it was a powerful religious experience that made me an athiest.

When I was about nine I went away on an activities weekend thing with Sunday School. We had daily sermons, and during one of those sermons in which the crucifixion of Christ was being described I was overcome with a powerful emotion of sorrow and love; I loved Christ and felt so sad that we'd killed the son of God; I felt at that moment that Jesus and God were within me and I loved them. I'll never forget how strongly that feeling manifested itself as if the power of God was coursing through by body.

I realised then the power of religion, the power of persuasion and manipulation of the mind. Very soon after that I despised this power that had caused me to become so delusional. What the church was doing to us kids was immoral; we were being indoctrinated and brainwashed. The process disgusted me; I was nine years old ffs! Not all kids were as fortunate as I was; some never escape the clutches of delusion as I did.

I ridicule religion in the hope that religion will die, and I think it's working. God's on borrowed time.
 
I find it astonishing how religious people have apparently acquired this reputation of being meek mild and benevolent, after centuries of violence and oppression. It's all forgotten in a second, to the point where now, people like Stick actually feel the need to be protective of them.

The fact that they still believe that I as an unsubscriber to this innocuous theory of theirs will face eternal damnation, doesn't really seem to register. It's all good, as long as you wish for sweet words while you pray to the almighty.

Meanwhile 'militant' atheists are running rampant on forums, daring to ridicule others for their beliefs! What wickedness.
 
ciderman9000000 said:
It's a shit theory though; full of holes. Why do you find it so baffling that a group of people can dismiss an poorly constructed theory as being entirely unfeasible? Are we expected to treat every theory with equal respect, no matter how bonkers or poorly conceived it may be? Shall we believe every theory to be accurate?
Click to expand...

No, not believe just approach. Attempting to understand (and sometimes quantify) a metaphysical concept with physical means is incorrect. But like I said before, if one is not interested that's OK too. But for one to assume that 'their path/method' is the only correct one to knowledge is wrong whether you're a believer or not.
 
Red-Indian said:
Personally, I'd commit to not ridiculing religious beliefs if they'd commit to not teaching children religion when they're defenseless.
Click to expand...

It amazes me that so many people who aren't themselves believers still baptise their kids. Doing so inherently reduces real choice. I think that my son is the only kid I know that hasn't been baptised (or initiated into other churches) despite the majority of my friends being either atheist or agnostic bordering on atheism. I view even baptism as a form of child abuse because it removes choice to a large degree.
 
ciderman9000000 said:
I wouldn't laugh at him for supporting Stoke just as I wouldn't laugh at somebody for wishing that God existed. I'd laugh at him if he believed Stoke were going to win the league though just as I'd laugh at somebody for believing in God.

Truth be told, I feel sorry for people who believe in God; I think ridiculing faith is the best way for the world to escape the poison of religion.

I was religious once, as a child. Ironically it was a powerful religious experience that made me an athiest.

When I was about nine I went away on an activities weekend thing with Sunday School. We had daily sermons, and during one of those sermons in which the crucifixion of Christ was being described I was overcome with a powerful emotion of sorrow and love; I loved Christ and felt so sad that we'd killed the son of God; I felt at that moment that Jesus and God were within me and I loved them. I'll never forget how strongly that feeling manifested itself as if the power of God was coursing through by body.

I realised then the power of religion, the power of persuasion and manipulation of the mind. Very soon after that I despised this power that had caused me to become so delusional. What the church was doing to us kids was immoral; we were being indoctrinated and brainwashed. The process disgusted me; I was nine years old ffs! Not all kids were as fortunate as I was; some never escape the clutches of delusion as I did.

I ridicule religion in the hope that religion will die, and I think it's working. God's on borrowed time.
Click to expand...

Because of your childhood experience now your POV is making sense to me. This imagery...

However I won't discuss your personal experience publicly and most certainly I won't mock it. Anyway what I want to comment on is... ridiculing does not achieve anything but a negative response. And if truly what you 'know' is good why ridicule and not educate?

Most 'atheist' responses I see here must include some form of sarcasm or belittlement, why? One thing I have detected for sure is Anger.
 
Abbsta said:
Because of your childhood experience now your POV is making sense to me. This imagery...

However I won't discuss your personal experience publicly and most certainly I won't mock it. Anyway what I want to comment on is... ridiculing does not achieve anything but a negative response. And if truly what you 'know' is good why ridicule and not educate?

Most 'atheist' responses I see here must include some form of sarcasm or belittlement, why? One thing I have detected for sure is Anger.
Click to expand...

There is a little bit of anger for sure. Obviously when you've been lied to and indoctrinated for a good bit of your life, you're bound to feel some resentment when you realise the cnut your parents and other figures of authority have been making you pray to doesn't really exist. It's not virulent though...I've still to see a single atheist speak the kind of incendiary stuff an average religious book speaks about non-believers.
 
Red-Indian said:
Personally, I'd commit to not ridiculing religious beliefs if they'd commit to not teaching children religion when they're defenseless. Ridicule is the main weapon we have to act as a weapon against this brainwashing so it's very difficult to give it up unilaterally.
Click to expand...

In the country where I live the parents baptise their children into religion. I find the idea of original sin deplorable in the Catholic faith but the parents can decide not to include their children.
 
ciderman9000000 said:
I wouldn't laugh at him for supporting Stoke just as I wouldn't laugh at somebody for wishing that God existed. I'd laugh at him if he believed Stoke were going to win the league though just as I'd laugh at somebody for believing in God.

Truth be told, I feel sorry for people who believe in God; I think ridiculing faith is the best way for the world to escape the poison of religion.

I was religious once, as a child. Ironically it was a powerful religious experience that made me an athiest.

When I was about nine I went away on an activities weekend thing with Sunday School. We had daily sermons, and during one of those sermons in which the crucifixion of Christ was being described I was overcome with a powerful emotion of sorrow and love; I loved Christ and felt so sad that we'd killed the son of God; I felt at that moment that Jesus and God were within me and I loved them. I'll never forget how strongly that feeling manifested itself as if the power of God was coursing through by body.

I realised then the power of religion, the power of persuasion and manipulation of the mind. Very soon after that I despised this power that had caused me to become so delusional. What the church was doing to us kids was immoral; we were being indoctrinated and brainwashed. The process disgusted me; I was nine years old ffs! Not all kids were as fortunate as I was; some never escape the clutches of delusion as I did.

I ridicule religion in the hope that religion will die, and I think it's working. God's on borrowed time.
Click to expand...

You think ridicule is the best way forward but I would argue that education is. Ridicule just serves to make the ridculer look bitter in my view.
 
Red-Indian said:
There is a little bit of anger for sure. Obviously when you've been lied to and indoctrinated for a good bit of your life, you're bound to feel some resentment when you realise the cnut your parents and other figures of authority have been making you pray to doesn't really exist. It's not virulent though...I've still to see a single atheist speak the kind of incendiary stuff an average religious book speaks about non-believers.
Click to expand...
Do you speak with anger about Santa Claus too?
 
Stick said:
Do you speak with anger about Santa Claus too?
Click to expand...


Good point I suppose. I guess the anger is more here because the issues are bigger. It's more or less the difference between the resentment you'd feel for a pickpocket and a murderer.

On the whole though, as I said, it's not very virulent(at least for me or for all the atheists I know personally). Just some resentment and irritation that manifests itself more on the internet than in real life because of the anonymity factor.

Now I just wish the churches in my area would stop preaching that unbelievers will go to hell. That should be classified as hate speech really.
 
Santa has never interfered with politics and whatnot. At least not that I'm aware of. However, that fecking Easter bunny keeps sticking his tail into things.
 
Red-Indian said:
Good point I suppose. I guess the anger is more here because the issues are bigger. It's more or less the difference between the resentment you'd feel for a pickpocket and a murderer.

On the whole though, as I said, it's not very virulent(at least for me or for all the atheists I know personally). Just some resentment and irritation that manifests itself more on the internet than in real life because of the anonymity factor.

Now I just wish the churches in my area would stop preaching that unbelievers will go to hell. That should be classified as hate speech really.
Click to expand...

I dont really resent the fact I was raised in a faith. I like the fact that it was ok to reject that faith when I grew up and examined it. I didnt see it as a disadvantage or a loss of time/energy either because to be fair I saw church as a social aspect as opposed to a praying opportunity.
 
Stick said:
I dont really resent the fact I was raised in a faith. I like the fact that it was ok to reject that faith when I grew up and examined it. I didnt see it as a disadvantage or a loss of time/energy either because to be fair I saw church as a social aspect as opposed to a praying opportunity.
Click to expand...

Well good for you I suppose. It was't that way with me and it seems like it wasn't that way for a few others here. Even when I was a kid and still believed in some of this nonsense, it was fairly annoying to be forced to go a temple and perform meaningless rituals. People react differently to things.

You're an atheist (or I think you are) who doesn't get irritated at all by religion and would treat their beliefs with respect. I'm one who does get mildly irritated by religion and find the beliefs funny and enjoy joking about them. There's atheists who find religion infuriatingly obtuse and invasive and look for opportunities to ridicule and rail against it. I find it funny the religious think all atheist are militant maniacs.

I suppose the end objective is the same...to move past these silly stone age beliefs (slightly modified a few times) and get people people to think and behave more rationally.
 
I despise religion, that's no secret and I feel no shame about that. The world needs to move on from such primitive delusions. I'd never take to violence against the religious though, and I've never heard of any atheist doing so (though I don't know for a fact that it hasn't happened at some point), which is more than can be said of the religious towards the non-believer. I'm happy to oppose religion through debate and ridicule; I agree that education is the most effective tool with which to oppose religion, but such education requires a fair degree of ridicule in my opinion. There's nothing wrong with ridiculing the ridiculous; how can we expect anybody to realise that religion is ridiculous if they're not ridiculed for believing in it?
 
It'd be a damn good waste of time if scientists were going around trying to prove God doesn't exist. Not only it would be an absurd endeavor in itself, but if it were to be done it wouldn't change a damn thing in the minds of the religious.
 
Arruda said:
It'd be a damn good waste of time if scientists were going around trying to prove God doesn't exist. Not only it would be an absurd endeavor in itself, but if it were to be done it change a damn thing in the minds of the religious.
Click to expand...


They're doing quite a decent job of it even without trying, in fairness.
 
Arruda said:
It'd be a damn good waste of time if scientists were going around trying to prove God doesn't exist. Not only it would be an absurd endeavor in itself, but if it were to be done it wouldn't change a damn thing in the minds of the religious.
Click to expand...

You don't have to prove god doesn't exist. You just continue investigating the make up of the universe and see what shows up.
 
Stick said:
You think ridicule is the best way forward but I would argue that education is. Ridicule just serves to make the ridculer look bitter in my view.
Click to expand...

I am bitter. It gives me a bitter feeling to know that such vast sections of humanity remain suffering from these strong delusions of God, and that they tried to make me one of them. How the feck has something so mental made it this far? I lost a lot of respect for humanity the day I realised that God was a lie. I wish the world would be rid of religion, that it'd be eradicated entirely and confined to the history books along with the Greek gods and fairies of the pagans. I know that this will occur sooner or later, but I nevertheless feel bitter because it hasn't occurred already. The religious lunacy of the devout in America, India and the Middle East is really quite stunning, and often extremely dangerous; I'm bitter because I'd expect better from people to be honest.
 
Stick said:
You don't have to prove god doesn't exist. You just continue investigating the make up of the universe and see what shows up.
Click to expand...


I know. That was more directed at the constant argument that science didn't prove he doesn't exist, like if it was some sort of limitation on science's part.
 
I have problems with his kind of bullshit homeschooling. Even the dog seems to think it's bullshit.

My reasons trace back to how I was raised. I attended public school my entire youth but that didn't stop teachers in Texas injecting their beliefs into the works. It also didn't stop family members from stating nonsense without any formal education or training in such fields.

 
I think many atheists are a bit bitter. I echo cider's sentiments perfectly.

I remember having God shoved down my throat for so long when I was a child. My late grandmother, who I always loved, scared the shit out of me. As a child I felt guilty of things I shouldn't be feeling guilty about and I was afraid of things that children shouldn't be afraid of. I remember making up petty sins for confession as the priest would give me a bollocking and call me a liar if I didn't have any to show for. I questioned why I had to go to church to that bore fest every Sunday. I questioned why the adults around me (like my mother) could get away from that bore fest and classify themselves as "nonpracticing Catholics" yet I couldn't.

I felt a lot more relieved when I understood I could just say I didn't believe it. No one bothered me about it, my grandmother was the only fanatic in the family and the only thing she could do was threaten me with hell, but at that point it didn't matter any more. Had I done that defiance in another time or another place and I could just be stoned to death.

What's there not to be bitter about?
 
So my theory that I have proven god doesn't exist in this thread is equally as valid as belief in god or the belief that you can't prove god doesn't exist.

God hasn't appeared and you can't prove I haven't proven he doesn't exist.


Oh and I really want to believe that I have proven he doesn't exist so that makes it far more likely that he doesn't exist and I get the added benefit that no one is allowed to mock my beliefs because you can't prove I'm wrong.

This is working better than I thought it would.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
So my theory that I have proven god doesn't exist in this thread is equally as valid as belief in god or the belief that you can't prove god doesn't exist.

God hasn't appeared and you can't prove I haven't proven he doesn't exist.


Oh and I really want to believe that I have proven he doesn't exist so that makes it far more likely that he doesn't exist and I get the added benefit that no one is allowed to mock my beliefs because you can't prove I'm wrong.

This is working better than I thought it would.
Click to expand...
Perfect thread title so.
 
My only real problem with religion (other than it being made up bollox of course) is that kids are exposed to it from a young age. I was and was fortunate enough to be exposed to different ideas during my teens that allowed me to connect the dots. Unfortunately, hundreds of millions of kids who are growing up in developing countries often don't have access to ideas that challenge the status quo, and therein lies the abuse. If kids weren't indoctrinated and brainwashed at such a young age, chances are the entire social structure of the planet would be less fractured and volatile.
 
Danny1982 said:
Nobody created "God", because "God" doesn't follow those cause-effect rules that our universe is built on.
Click to expand...


To think even for a minute my purpose in life, or morality and world view rested on logic like this, would be a scary minute indeed.

Things don't exist just because we want them to.

Making stuff up about whether cause and effect applies outside the universe in order to shoehorn in a god who wasn't created because you need a god who wasn't created otherwise the whole house of cards falls. It’s a lame idea and at best a guess.

Have you missed the obvious point that the universe could just come into being without a god if cause and effect don't exist. Your own idea replaces the need for a creator.

 
@Cider:
I am sorry that you think education requires some redicule. It's the same idea about corporal punishment. The teacher fails to convey his/her message/argument and would resort to 'low level' tactics to 'win' or finish the chapter asap. Be it canning, ridiculing etc. IMO it is a form of bullying.

Hurting people's sensitivities would generate some form of physical response from an extrovert such as physical violence or deep psychological problems with introverts which could manifest itself physically later.

I agree that there is some bad religion out there just like there is bad science. But ultimately it is us humans and what we do with this knowledge.

It's fair enough if you are happy where you are and I have absolutely no problem with that. My only 'concern' is not realising how anger could become toxic to the intellect.

@Arruda:
Anger and bittterness would cloud one's judgement. What religion (should) attempts to do is teach us how to deal with our make up and the world we live in.

My background is more international since I lived in many places. But my main 'clashes' came from schools where I was debating ideas with my teachers in the ME. Ignoring what I am going through right now and If you only knew my story you would be surprised that I am still a believer. I have just turned 43 and I have nothing material to show for it. This is from a guy who went to uni when he was 15 and I don't even have a degree. I have every reason to feel angry all the time. I feel my life (youth) has gone to waist. But understanding my human make up and knowing that I have to go through the Grieving phase and then the Hate phase and then Peace helps a great deal. Also knowing that I am smart enough to build something new and fresh and be happy again. I always try to look inward first.

I believe (sorry Wibble I know you don't like this word) in the goodness of human nature and it is that where I invest my energy in and having worked at a grass roots level helps a great deal in understanding where the problems lie.

Good Education is key.
 
To be honest, I get Danny's reasoning. As everything in this universe is contingently existing, the catalyst not exist contingently but essentially. The biggest flaw in his argument, and Silva and Cider have touched on this, is why this "something" must exist as a personal God. Why does He have to have certain attributes, like sentience and why would he be egotistical enough to forward a reward-punishment system for the life that he purportedly designed? How do you make the leap from the belief of a creator through logical necessity to the Abrahamic God or Allah?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.